WVSU Faculty Senate Meeting

WVSU Faculty Senate Meeting Friday, March 4, 2016 – 1:30 Hamblin Auditorium

1. Call to order: The Faculty Senate Meeting was called to order by Chair, Dr. Tim Ruhnke at 1:40 p.m.

2. Review/approval of minutes: Minutes from the Faculty Senate Meeting held February 5, 2016 were reviewed. Motion to accept the minutes was made (Alderman/Ray) and carried. 3. Approval of the agenda: Motion to approve the agenda carried (Fultz/Ray). 4. Comments from the Chair: Dr. Ruhnke reviewed that due to budget constraints, the University has limited purchasing. Beginning last month, purchasing is only allowed out of the offices of the Vice Presidents. This was discussed in the Faculty Senate Executive Committee meeting held February 26, 2016. Members of the Executive Committee expressed concerns about being able to function normally with such restrictions on purchasing. After the meeting, Dr. Ruhnke met with President Hemphill to discuss this matter. Dr. Hemphill (not in attendance at this meeting) shared with Dr. Ruhnke that the University has cash reserves enough to fund three payroll cycles. The budget deficit for the state of West Virginia has been well represented in news reports and newspapers. The state’s next payment to the University is due in April. The new purchasing procedures were put in to place in case there are issues with that payment. Dr. Ruhnke noted that we need to be more strategic moving forward. Academic Affairs is fiscally responsible, but this is not always the case with all programs. Discussion was made about how the cash reserves number is calculated – student fee accounts are included in calculating cash reserves. Funding for specific purposes may be used to fund other purposes in extreme situations. State appropriations amount approximately $10 million, while student tuition and fees generate approximately $12 million. Dr. Ruhnke mentioned that if the budget continues to decrease, discussions may ensue regarding closing down various athletic programs. He noted that in those discussions, the dorm should be considered as many athletes live in the dorms and there is a bond to pay. Dr. Ruhnke noted that we are probably entering into an era of difficult choices. Dr. Guetzloff noted that personnel cuts may be required. 5. Reports a. Provost Jayasuriya: After the Faculty Senate Executive meeting of February 26, 2016, Provost Jayasuriya met with President Hemphill regarding the concerns of the group about new purchasing requirements that require all purchases to be made at the Vice-President level. Dr. Hemphill indicated that the choice was to have this process or possibly not be able to make payroll. The Provost has been through a similar situation at an institution of higher education in another state. He indicated that the cash reserves are in fee accounts. The administration is planning for cuts in the range of 8-16%. Eighty percent of the budget is personnel. There was a discussion on how much tuition would increase. In regard to Learning House, the Provost reported that “things are going well”. Dr. Guetzloff noted that this is one of the ways to increase revenue. Dr. Ray asked about training for Learning House. During Spring Break, faculty will be training on how to use Moodle. Later, Learning House will provide face-to-face training on how to develop courses in Learning House. Learning House will also train students, with the assistance of the Center for Online Learning. Further discussion included holding seats for 100% online students, continuity across different sections of the same course, and getting Banner and financial aid ready for 8-week courses. b. EPC – Dr. Michael Fultz: Dr. Fultz submitted the EPC report for this month in written format. Motion to accept the report (Alderman/Baker) carried. c. ACF – Dr. Rich Ford: ACF continues to monitor actions of the Legislature, especially with regard to the tobacco tax and a bill to decrease the PEIA board. Considerable discussion was made regarding ACF’s work on transferability of courses across institutions in West Virginia – courses, timelines, etc. d. Graduate Council – Dr. Rich Ford: The Council is working on an application process to be used by the graduate programs. This will provide a centralized system for processing applications. e. BOG Report – Dr. Tom Guetzloff: Dr. Guetzloff discussed budget cuts during the Comments from the Chair portion of the meeting. He said that the $600,000 received from Bayer Crop Science is being spent. The search for a new President is ongoing. The premilinary pool has not yet been set, as noted by Dr. Ruhnke, as review of credentials had not started yet. Discussion was made on if layoffs or personnel cuts were made, when would those employees be notified. The Provost noted that the deadline regarding retention of faculty members was March 1 and there is a deadline for other employees. f. Library Committee – Dr. Willette Stinson: This report was deferred until the April meeting. g. Academic Appeals – Dr. Sean Collins: Dr. Collins submitted a written report. He suggested to the Deans that when they receive an appeal and are in agreement with the professor, to submit the appeal to the committee, not the Provost first. The policy allows for either choice. If it goes to the Provost first, the committee is effectively eliminated from the appeal process as they make a recommendation and the Provost makes a decision. Additionally, the policy notes that the Provost’s decision is final. Considerable discussion ensued and the procedures for “Appeals of Final Grades” from the Student Handbook were reviewed. The question was raised as to whether or not professors have a right to appeal. Deans Council will look at this issue. Motion to accept the committee’s report (Ray/Harris) was approved. 6. Old Business a. Change to Cultural Activities: Mike Workman is Chair of the Cultural Activities Committee. Dr. Ruhnke discussed the proposed changes to the Faculty Senate Constitution and Bylaws and the committee is in agreement with the proposed changes which read as follows: It shall be the function of this committee to plan, organize and develop programs for the university educational assemblies and to be responsible for the presentation each year of the Artists Series programs and other programs for the University. This committee shall consist of the Program Coordinator, who shall serve as an ex-officio non-voting member, four (4) elected faculty members (one from each college), six (6) elected faculty members elected at large from any college, and four (4) students (one representing each college appointed by the respective deans), and a nonvoting advisory members from the Douglas Institute (formerly ACEOP) who shall be appointed by the Vice President for Research and shall serve for one year, ex-officio (non-voting representatives from the Office of the Provost and the office of University Relations, and the Chair of the General Education Committee. (amended, 3/2016) Motion to accept the changes to the Faculty Senate Constitution and Bylaws (Harris/Ray) carried. 7. New Business

a. Revised faculty evaluation instrument – Dean Zaman: Dean Zaman introduced a draft form of a revised instrument to be used for faculty evaluations for retention, promotion, tenure, and merit. The Deans Council, under the direction of Provost Jayasuriya, developed the instrument because of concerns regarding the old instrument. According to Dean Zaman, the old instrument is ambiguous and not measurable. The group tried to make activities on the new form “measured” with “less and less gray area”. Professional Development and Scholarly Activities are changed to Research and Scholarly Activities with Professional Development Activities being moved to the Service section of the evaluation. Dr. Ruhnke offered to send the draft to the faculty email listserv and request feedback from faculty. Considerable discussion ensued. The Self-Report would use the evaluation form as an outline for faculty to submit their reports. For retention matters, one year would be considered. For promotion and/or tenure, scores across years included in the review period would be averaged for consideration. Three levels of performance are noted (Marginal, Satisfactory, and Excellent) and scores will be calculated in three areas (Teaching, Research and Scholarly Activities, and Service). Applications with Excellent in two areas with a Satisfactory in the final area will be considered. Applications with Excellent in one area with Satisfactory ratings in the other two areas could be considered with a strong narrative. Provost Jayasuriya is in favor and would like to see faculty in agreement. This item will be revisited in the April Faculty Senate meeting.

b. Senate Executive 2016-2017: Dr. Ruhnke sent notice to the colleges to inform them of needed elections for next year’s Faculty Senate. Additionally, an election will be held for Chair, Vice- Chair and Secretary.

Adjourn at 4:12

Dr. Emily Waugh, Secretary